Water Resources Management

, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp 1227–1241 | Cite as

Comparing Two Multi-Criteria Methods for Prioritizing Wetland Restoration and Creation Sites Based on Ecological, Biophysical and Socio-Economic Factors

  • Nadia Darwiche-Criado
  • Ricardo Sorando
  • Silvia G. Eismann
  • Francisco A. Comín


Wetland restoration has been recognized as a useful tool for improving water quality. Many studies have focused on developing strategies and models to optimize wetland performance. However, some important wetland placement characteristics have not been taken into account. In this research and unlike other studies, we included the social aspect (availability of public lands) as a fundamental factor to locate wetlands. Thus, environmental, biophysical and socio-economic factors were integrated through the comparison of two multi-criteria methods (a suitability model and a greedy algorithm). With nitrate removal as the main goal, the suitability model was applied considering the “terrain slope”, “proximity to watercourses” and “soil permeability”. The greedy algorithm was executed based on the “availability of public lands” and the “wetland restoration project costs”. These factors were chosen based on the Eu Life-CREAMAgua Flumen River project, which was carried out previously in the study area. Both the suitability model and the greedy algorithm provided critical information for siting a wetland and demonstrated the effectiveness of both approaches. By means of this study, we present highly applicable results as they are based on a real project (Eu Life-CREAMAgua Flumen River project), besides proposing and using the social factor as an innovative approach for the wetlands siting. This research and its possible adaptations can be used by decision makers to improve water quality using social and economic criteria, resulting in the efficient implementation of ecological-restoration projects.


Wetlands Nitrate removal Environmental planning Watershed management Multi-criteria GIS 



This study is part of the European Project Life09 ENV/ES/000431 CREAMAgua, which is coordinated and led by Comarca de Los Monegros-Aragón. We also thank the project’s partners: Confederación Hidrográfica del Ebro, KV Consultores and Tragsa, IEM and FJDM. We are also very appreciative of M. García and A. Barcos for their laboratory assistance.


  1. Acreman MC, Fisher J, Stratford CJ, Mould DJ, Mountford JO (2007) Hydrological science and wetland restoration: some case studies from Europe. Hydrol Earth Syst Sc 11(1):158–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almendinger JE (1998) A method to prioritize and monitor wetland restoration for water-quality improvement. Wet Ecol Mana 6(4):241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: model development. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34(1):73–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baban SJ, Wan-Yusof K (2003) Modelling optimum sites for locating reservoirs in tropical environments. Water Resour Manag 17(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Comín FA, Menéndez M, Pedrocchi C, Moreno S, Sorando R, Cabezas A, García M, Rosas V, Moreno D, González E, Gallardo B, Herrera JA, Ciancarelli C (2005) Wetland restoration: integrating scientific-technical, economic and social perspectives. Ecol Restor 23(3):181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Comín FA, Sorando R, Darwiche-Criado N, García M, Masip A (2014) A protocol to prioritize wetland restoration and creation for water quality improvement in agricultural watersheds. Ecol Eng 66:10–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Darwiche-Criado N, Comín FA, Sorando R, Sánchez-Pérez JM (2015a) Seasonal variability of NO3− mobilization during flood events in a Mediterranean catchment: the influence of intensive agricultural irrigation. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:208–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Darwiche-Criado N, Jiménez JJ, Comín FA, Sorando R, Sánchez-Pérez JM (2015b) Identifying spatial and seasonal patterns of river water quality in a semiarid irrigated agricultural Mediterranean basin. Environ Sci Pollut R. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-5484-5 Google Scholar
  9. Darwiche-Criado N, Comín FA, Masip A, García M, Eismann SG, Sorando R (2016) Effects of wetlands restoration on nitrate removal in an irrigated agricultural area: the role of in-stream and off-stream wetlands. Ecol Eng. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.03.016 Google Scholar
  10. Giupponi C, Eiselt B, Ghetti PF (1999) A multicriteria approach for mapping risks of agricultural pollution for water resources: the Venice lagoon watershed case study. J Environ Manag 56(4):259–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haycock NE, Pinay G, Walker C (1993) Nitrogen retention in river corridors: European perspective. Ambio 22:340–346Google Scholar
  12. Hoffmann CC, Rysgaard S, Berg P (2000) Denitrification rates predicted by nitrogen-15 labeled nitrate microcosm studies, in situ measurements and modeling. J Environ Qual 29(6):2020–2028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jasrotia AS, Majhi A, Singh S (2009) Water balance approach for rainwater harvesting using remote sensing and GIS techniques, Jammu Himalaya, India. Water Resour Manag 23(14):3035–3055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kadlec RH, Knight RL (1996) Treatment wetlands. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  15. Kotti IP, Sylaios GK, Tsihrintzis VA (2016) Fuzzy modeling for nitrogen and phosphorus removal estimation in free-water surface constructed wetlands. Environ Process 3(1):65–79. doi: 10.1007/s40710-016-0177-8
  16. Leonardson L, Bengtsson L, Davidsson T, Persson T, Emanuelsson U (1994) Nitrogen retention in artificially flooded meadows. Ambio 23(6):332–341Google Scholar
  17. Lesta M, Mauring T, Mander Ü (2007) Estimation of landscape potential for construction of surface-flow wetlands for wastewater treatment in Estonia. Environ Manag 40(2):303–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martín-Queller E, Moreno-Mateos D, Pedrocchi C, Cervantes J, Martínez G (2010) Impacts of intensive agricultural irrigation and livestock farming on a semi-arid Mediterranean catchment. Environ Monit Assess 167:423–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mdee OJ (2015) Spatial distribution runoff in ungauged catchments in Tanzania. Water Utility Journal 9:61–70Google Scholar
  20. Mitsch WJ, Jorgensen SE (2003) Ecological engineering and ecosystem restoration. John Wiley and Sons, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  21. Mitsch WJ, Wilson RF (1996) Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecol App 6(1):77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moreno-Mateos D, Mander Ü, Pedrocchi C (2010) Optimal location of created and restored wetlands in Mediterranean agricultural catchments. Water Resour Manag 24(11):2485–2499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Newbold S (2005) A combined hydrologic simulation and landscape design model to prioritize sites for wetlands restoration. Environ Model Assess 10(3):251–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Palmeri L, Trepel M (2002) A GIS-based score system for siting and sizing of created or restored wetlands: two case studies. Water Resour Manag 16(4):307–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Petursdottir T, Aradottir AL, Benediktsson K (2013) An evaluation of the short-term progress of restoration combining ecological assessment and public perception. Restor Ecol 21(1):75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Phua MH, Minowa M (2005) A GIS-based multi-criteria decision making approach to forest conservation planning at a landscape scale: a case study in the Kinabalu area, Sabah, Malaysia. Landscape Urban Plan 71(2–4):207–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Richardson MS, Gatti RC (1999) Prioritizing wetland restoration activity within a Wisconsin watershed using GIS modeling. J Soil Water Conserv 54:537–542Google Scholar
  28. Saroinsong F, Harashina K, Arifin H, Gandasasmita K, Sakamoto K (2007) Practical application of a land resources information system for agricultural landscape planning. Landscape Urban Plan 79(1):38–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schimming CG, Schrautzer J, Reiche EW, Munch JC (2001) Nitrogen retention and loss from ecosystems of the Bornhoved lake district. In: Tenhunen JD, Lenz R, Hantschel R (eds) Ecological studies 147: ecosystem approaches to landscape Management in Central Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp 97–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Store R, Kangas J (2001) Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modeling. Landscape Urban Plan 55(2):79–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sutton MA, Howard C, Erisman JW, Billen G, Bleeker A, Grennfelt P, Van Grinsven H, Grizzetti B (2011) The European nitrogen assessment. University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Swinson B, Cockerill K, Colby J, Tuberty S, Gu C (2015) To restore or not to restore: assessing pre-project conditions of a habitat restoration project on the New River, North Carolina. Environ Process 2(4):647–668. doi: 10.1007/s40710-015-0111-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Trepel M, Palmeri L (2002) Quantifying nitrogen retention in surface flow wetlands for environmental planning at the landscape-scale. Ecol Eng 19(2):127–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Underhill LG (1994) Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms. Biol Conserv 70(1):85–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Lonkhuyzen RA, LaGory KE, Kuiper JA (2004) Modeling the suitability of potential wetland mitigation sites with a geographic information system. Environ Manag 33(3):368–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang X, Yu S, Huang GH (2004) Land allocation based on integrated GIS-optimization modeling at a watershed level. Landscape Urban Plan 66(2):61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. White D, Fennessy S (2005) Modeling the suitability of wetland restoration potential at the watershed scale. Ecol Eng 24(4):359–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zedler JB (2003) Wetlands at your service: reducing impacts of agriculture at the watershed scale. Front Ecol Environ 1(2):65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zucca A, Sharifi AM, Fabbri AG (2008) Application of spatial multi-criteria analysis to site selection for a local park: a case study in the Bergamo Province, Italy. J Environ Manag 88(4):752–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadia Darwiche-Criado
    • 1
  • Ricardo Sorando
    • 1
  • Silvia G. Eismann
    • 1
  • Francisco A. Comín
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología-CSICZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations